A few weeks ago, President Barack Obama announced that he would nominate Dartmouth President Jim Yong Kim to succeed Robert Zoellick at the helm of the World Bank. Kim comes into the job facing major challenges and questions, particularly whether he will continue his predecessor’s disastrous efforts to turn the World Bank from an organization focused on economic development, to one that favors instituting a radical environmental agenda. Recently the World Bank released a new report documenting the ongoing fight against illegal logging, calling on the authorities to “fight organized crime in illegal logging the way we go after gangsters selling drugs or racketeering.” Ostensibly, ‘Justice for Forests,’ appeared to be the kind of report that the Consumers Alliance could support. Organized crime anywhere is a major problem, with bribes being passed along to middle men in order to undermine trade.
However, the World Bank’s report is yet another example of the Bank’s love affair with the radical environmentalist movement. Despite there being robust research on illegal logging, the World Bank resorts to sourcing discredited information from Greenpeace—an ideological organization that’s hardly the bastion of impartial news. What’s more, the report calls for countries to pass similar legislation to the Lacey Act, because it “enables the prosecution of anyone knowingly in possession of illegal timber.” But this ignores the fact that Lacey has been abused by ideologues who wish to destroy corporate reputations, rather than actually enforcing the law. In sum, this report is yet another painful reminder that the World Bank is slowly moving away from its developmental goals in pursuit of an ideological agenda.
One can only hope that Kim takes a different line to Zoellick, embracing the dynamism of markets and trade, rather kowtowing to WWF and Greenpeace’s corrupt green agenda.
WWF “Misrepresents” Data on Singapore
For years Singapore has either topped or finished in the top three of the Heritage Foundation’s ‘Index of Economic Freedom.’ Not only is Singapore one of the global leaders for attracting investment, but it’s Economic Miracle has naturally made it a target for greens who despise innovation, aspiration and wealth creation. It therefore came as little surprise that Singapore would be targeted by WWF. Despite Singapore’s stellar environmental reputation, WWF released a report claiming that the country was the highest emitter in the Asia-Pacific region, pinning the majority of the blame on business and industry. Do we need any more evidence of WWF’s real objectives?
However, the government in Singapore shot back at WWF, with the prime minister claiming that WWF’s report “seriously misrepresents the situation.” The main issue of contention pertains to WWF’s methodology, with the government claiming that the organization had compiled its report using flawed data. In their report, WWF “counts emissions from goods that a country imports as attributed to that country.” However, the government of Singapore, which uses a methodology endorsed by the United Nations, only counts emissions that “are attributed to the country producing those goods.”
So what has WWF done? They are effectively double-counting emissions, attributing the same emissions from production to both exporting and importing countries. What better way to prove a political point by distorting facts? And following similar, legislative efforts by the EU to impose distortive emissions assessments on imported products and services, this reflects a rising trend from protectionists to manipulate environmental criteria to justify trade barriers. Thus, WWF has done its utmost to create a fresh methodology that creates a skewed outcome and obfuscates Singapore’s real emissions. This lends a whole new meaning to the adage, “the ends justify the means.” Nice try WWF.
Greens Isolated as Unions Fight Back Against FSC
Late last year, we highlighted Governor Paul LePage’s executive order on building certification standards, specifically his efforts to allow Maine “to source wood products from various certification schemes, such as the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).” Governor LePage is not a lonely voice, with support emerging from across the political spectrum from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) to inject greater competition into the certification process, specifically to allow SFI-certified products to be used by U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) for its LEED rating system. Moves to rationalize the LEED rating system are long overdue, but this doesn’t mean that the Forest Stewardship Council will stand idly by and protect their monopoly.
The IAMAW’s support is a major blow for the greens and their attempts to monopolize certification in the forestry industry through the Forest Stewardship Council. USGBC now finds itself under growing pressure to put an end to their senseless – and politically motivated – support of FSC and embrace the bipartisan solutions being put forward by Republicans and unions to overhaul its LEED rating system. But what’s most damning is that IAMAW cites its preference for SFI over FSC because the latter is often “vulnerable to the whims of large special interest groups who are able to dictate outcomes that in the past have been harmful to workers, their communities, and forest health.” Of course, we could not agree more. It’s time for USGBC to drop its blind loyalty to FSC. American workers and, most of all, taxpayers deserve better.
The Politics of the International Reporting Project and ‘Green Movie Night’
As the rest of the world waited in anticipation for the ‘Hunger Games,’ Johns Hopkins University thought they’d run their own work of fiction with the short film, ‘Indonesia’s Palm Oil Dilemma.’ The film, part of the university’s International Reporting Project ‘Environmental Film Festival’ is yet another predictable stab at the Indonesian palm oil industry, a source of employment for thousands of Indonesians and the bête noire of the protectionist and anti-trade environmental movement. Rather than embrace anti-poverty measures in the developing world, the film seeks to do the opposite—smear Indonesia’s economy and prologue their reliance on economic aid. When one considers that IRP is meant to be an initiative that “seeks to fill the gap left by much of the mainstream media’s reduction of international news,” it’s somewhat concerning that they would run such a film when the bias media market is already oversaturated.
The film was taken by Jacob Templin of TIME, who visited Indonesia with “impartial” NPR producer and Virginia Public Radio’s Charlottesville chief, Sandra Hausman. Hausman, a long critic of free market capitalism and an unabashed ally of Greenpeace and WWF, recently used her publicly funded pulpit to attack the Alliance, launching an entirely one-sided polemic against the campaigns we run to ensure that Virginia maintains a business environment conducive to private investment. How NPR affiliates can even claim to maintain a semblance of impartiality when they employ green crusaders such as Hausman is particularly baffling, particularly when she is channeling the views of an organization that appears to get a kick out of criminality. It’s concerning that Johns Hopkins would allow their esteemed academic institution to become affiliated with journalists interested in spreading such ill-informed and partial views on the developing world.
Greenpeace Takes Over Dutch Labor: New Leader, Colonial Agenda?
It’s official. Greenpeace now has its own political party. Last week Diederik Samsom was elected leader of the Labor Party in the Netherlands, an event that most commentators have claimed will push the Dutch opposition to the far-left. Samson, of course, is a former Greenpeace activist, an organization that has long benefitted from funds from the Dutch Lottery to wage insidious anti-free market campaigns against the developing world, especially in Indonesia. Indonesians should take note.
As a former Dutch colony, Indonesia retains strong cultural and economic ties to the Netherlands, exporting some $2 billion worth of goods per year. However, with Samsom’s ascension, observers in Indonesia will be paying much closer attention to political affairs in Indonesia through fear that the new Labor Party leader will seek to leverage his historical ties to Greenpeace in order to derail trade initiatives and anti-poverty measures in South-East Asia. As we all know, Greenpeace was recently evicted from Indonesia after endeavoring to undermine the country’s forestry industry, a source of income for thousands of Indonesians. With the governing Liberal VVD Party no longer able to rely on its coalition members for a parliamentary majority, some have suggested that the Netherlands will need new elections. If Labor emerged triumphant, Indonesians would not only have to contest with a Dutch-funded NGO, but the power of the entire Dutch government.
Recent News from the Green Movement
Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman’s war of words with the Humane Society is showing no sign of ending anytime soon. The Humane Society is pressuring the governor to apologize after he threatened to kick the organization “out of the state,” due to their anti-farming policies. But thankfully, Governor Heineman remains defiant, using a speech before the Future Farmers of America to accuse the Humane Society of employing an agenda that would “destroy the future for these kids standing behind me.” Despite their claims that they are “working with farmers,” the Humane Society are clearly struggling to win of Nebraskans. Governor Heineman continues to receive backing from farmers’ groups and elected officials. And with Nebraska’s economy under threat from the Humane Society, who blames them?
A Greenpeace-commissioned poll has found that just two percent of the British population would describe the Conservative-led government as “the greenest government ever.” Despite what some of the left-wing press might think, this could be one of the greatest achievements by David Cameron’s government! Cameron’s government has regularly come under scrutiny in these newsletters, particularly for being far too soft on the greens. But the government now appears to be spurning the greens, taking a much more positive path towards job growth, even cutting the British corporation tax to 22 percent by 2014. If they’ve not already discovered this, it will soon be clear to the Cameron government that they will never win over the greens. They’ll always want something and you can never appease them. They should wear this poll like a badge of honor.
Recently we highlighted how India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had accused western-funded environmental groups of undermining his country’s economy by blocking attempts to construct new nuclear power facilities. Obviously unhappy at being called out, Greenpeace have shot back after police were forced to make arrests. The travails of the Indian government are, unfortunately, commonplace amongst developing nations where Greenpeace has a presence. Greenpeace uses foreign funds to undermine development, even when nations require additional resources to improve living standards and alleviate poverty. The measures currently being taken by the Indian government have come under some criticism, but when you have unaccountable groups seeking to destroy livelihoods, what are the alternatives? Other developing nations shouldn’t just monitor the actions of the Indian government. They should follow suit.
Greenpeace went all out recently, accusing the European Union of “plundering” fisheries in African waters. Given Greenpeace’s open disdain for the fisheries, it’s curious that they would suddenly decide to stand up for the industry in Africa. But one crucial question has to be asked. If Greenpeace is so concerned about “plundering” in Africa, where were they when their green bedfellows, WWF, failed to put the appropriate measures in place to prevent widespread fraud and embezzlement in Tanzania? If Greenpeace had genuine concerns about the well-being of people on the continent, they would have at least put out a statement, right? No need to answer that one.
Be sure to look out for our next newsletter as we uncover the dirty tricks and stealth campaigning of some of the world’s most notorious environmental activists.